Purpose -This paper seeks to disseminate knowledge regarding the experiences of a student team in implementing a campus-level sustainability initiative, outlining the strategy to measure the potential impact of this initiative. Design/methodology/approach -Project design is a case study. Via interviewing and surveys, the study observed student and faculty attitudes, information levels and behaviors regarding sustainability both before and after project implementation. Calculated sustainability scores were calculated for both faculty and students. Data were collected with the intention of understanding first, if any changes occurred in these campus community members, and second, if changes occurred, could the changes be linked to the project. Findings -Faculty experienced a significant increase in sustainability scores over the course of the project. Faculty interviews were used to glean a rich understanding of attitudes, information and behaviors about sustainability. A building waste audit was conducted to substantiate any self-reported changes in recycling behavior. In contrast, students experienced either a significant decrease in sustainability scores or an insignificant decrease in sustainability scores. Large-scale, campus-wide behavioral changes of individuals did not take place. Some community members showcase sustainable behaviors, but for reasons not definitively linked with this project and its outreach. Practical implications -This project serves as a stepping stone for other student teams; an opportunity to learn from our successes and mistakes, improving design of similar projects. General information about this type of project was discovered namely faculty and student participants were cooperative and outreach was not as extensive as imagined. The study also suggest future research could benefit from analyzing barriers to sustainable behaviors, addressing these in outreach for a similar project. Evaluating future projects to understand their effectiveness produces increasingly informative research. Originality/value -This paper looks beyond the initial enthusiasm for conducting campus sustainability projects, shedding light on the ways they may effect the campus community.

PurposeTo identify some of the barriers to mobilizing students of higher education in sustainable initiatives, in order to enhance project success on campuses.Design/methodology/approachUses a case study of a model green building retrofit on the College of Charleston campus in Charleston, South Carolina, USA. Several constraints already identified in the literature are pin‐pointed in this case study as well as additional barriers important for understanding success (or the lack of success) of sustainability efforts. Using participant observation, delineates new impediments and lists previously studied constraints from existing literature.FindingsPrevious barriers identified include: stereotypes associated with activism; apathy among students; lack of tangible results; lack of coordination among the campus community; troubling national policies; cuts in state budgets; lack of project funding; and lack of sufficient time to implement satisfactory projects. New barriers include: the emotional dynamics between students and the issues associated with an urban, municipal, historic campus.Research limitations/implicationsThe case study is based on results after one year of project work versus long‐term results. The conclusions are intended to help all campuses, but particularly include historic and urban institutions and emotional dynamics between case study participants.Practical implicationsOvercoming barriers for an urban campus has the practical implications of a beneficial student project for both campus and community stakeholders.Originality/valueThe addition of these constraints to the list of barriers will help campus mobilization efforts to better anticipate and address concerns of students, and take into account the real‐world issues associated with sustainability, such as corresponding with the local municipality's needs, particularly addressing stringent historic preservation codes and various socio‐economic groups.